Why so much hate for Landlords on MN?

[coulditbeme2323]

Who do LL's get so much hate on MN?

It seems so much more hate than there is any real life.

Landlords will have to do this though. Aawabs law is being rolled out to private landlords. So if a landlord has a property a tenant can’t cook in without “causing damp” then it’s not fit for purpose.

aawabs law isn’t strange.

As I said in my post.

I cook a lot. One day a week, I prepare a week's meals and the kitchen is awash with steam / heat. I open a window. No damp problem.

Why do we even have opening windows if using them for ventilation makes a house not fit for purpose? Just have fully sealed glass, non opening.

I've lived in my 'not fit for purpose' house in a nice area for 12 years with no issue through sensible window ventilation. Whereas the previous owner's tenants had a damp problem.

People don't automatically become stupid just because they don't physically own the property they live in.

The point is, landlords can not blame tenant behaviour for damp and mould. They can not expect- or force- someone to open windows in their own home.

as I say I don’t open windows when cooking- if I was renting why would I change the habit of a lifetime?
As to why people don’t open windows when they’re cooking - because it’s cold? Raining? All sorts of perfectly normal reasons not to inconvenience yourself because the landlord didn’t retrofit ventilation.

Disagree

I don't care, just find it silly.

The courts were at your disposal.

Profit isn't a dirty word

This isn't strictly true. The tenant has an obligation to make sure the house is reasonably ventilated which includes using available extractor fans etc but also opening windows where it's obviously sensible to do so. If opening a window requires adequate 'purge ventilation' then the landlord has no obligation to upgrade the kitchen with an extractor fan.

Landlords are leeches on society 😆 🤣 😂 my partner is a landlord, who has had the same great tenants for years. Every year he pays a huge amount of tax for the privilege of renting his house out. What a filthy leech!

Small landlords are often pretty incompetent, tend to moan about the tenant paying their mortgage doing outrageous things like hanging pictures (🙄), use agencies which do everything possible to ensure they needn’t return deposits and, if you think about it, many are huge benefit recipients, having their btl mortgage paid for by the taxpayer via housing benefit. Unlike councils or housing associations their profit is rarely used to invest in new housing stock, helping keep housing in crisis and ramping up rents in the private sector. And just to add, I am not a tenant and haven’t been since leaving university.

I think the housing crisis has caused a giant disparity and ultimately most landlords are in it for the asset and not for the tenant.

in 2004 I private rented a 3 storey 5 bed town house on an ex council estate. My private rent was £425 a month. The identical council house next door was £325. Those similar owned houses were up for sale for £70-85k. The house I was in had an indoor water feature and the landlord failed to fix the leak for 15 months. We finally moved out when the toilet ceiling collapsed on my 2 yo daughter.

Today, my daughter lives in an identical 5 bedroom council house in the same town. Her rent is £460 a month. A house of that same size/same estate is now renting for £1200 a month and selling for £180,000.

make it make sense. I feel awful for anybody that is forced to private rent.

Agents don't hold deposits.

I was a landlord. My property was immaculate new carpets, newly painted, new kitchen and bathroom, manicured garden. I maintained it, I kept the rent at an affordable level.

Every tenant trashed it.

I sold.

maybe there are bad landlords because the good ones are getting out as people are total dicks.

Why should private landlords not keep the profit made? Bloody hell I wish there was a profit. I keep advising my O/H to sell his place. Its actually costing him more than he's making. He refused the agency's advice to increase the rent for years as he would rather keep his reliable tenants. He's way out of pocket.

Inflation means that the £325 paid in 2004 would now be the equivalent of £650. Your daughter's rent hasn't even kept up with inflation and herein lies the issue. Council housing is subsidised by the State.

Again house prices have actually only increased around £40K in real terms over 20 years in your scenario. You have to account for inflation otherwise it's like saying you could buy a bottle of milk for 3p in 1960 and suggesting modern prices are unacceptably high. Inflation is key!

If a landlord bought the house at £180,000 they would be paying around £10k alone on interest each year. They would also need to cover maintenance, letting fees and pay tax on any rent paid to them. Realistically they could charge £1200 a month and still make a loss.

We can't afford for the government to so heavily subsidise everyone's housing.

Can't force them to open windows?

Attitudes like this add to the massive shortage of available rental housing. Asking people to use basic common sense is peak entitlement.

This is a parallel universe.

Agreed.

Well you don't really make a loss though do you. And I say this as a landlord.

Assuming you have a mortgage, I assume the 'loss' is that it doesn't cover its costs so you have to chip in a bit towards the mortgage. That isn't a loss, it's just you having to cover a bit of the cost of the asset you own. You don't 'lose' that money, the house belongs to you.

That's not quite true.

How come?

I'm a landlord and that's very much how I see the world. I don't make a yield really, I'm just happy at the end of the mortgage term I'll have a house I own outright that someone else has basically paid for for me (other than deposit of course).

If properties are owned as a company (which many are) then there is every chance that the company can run at a loss a year major works need doing.

Sure the asset is going up, but you can still make a yearly loss.

It's a bit like a company who might spend millions launching a new product and run at a loss that year, but the share price goes up because the product is a good one.

And also this.

My mortgages are all interest only except one. Almost every LL I know has all interest only mortgages and I belong to a LL association so know a lot. Strange why so many people do t understand this is the default LL model of business.

Well the poster I was responding to was not a company, they are an individual with one property (like me). And I think their description of a 'loss' is a bit disingenuous when really it's just chipping in to the cost of an asset you own. Just like if I put money in an ISA I'm not making a loss because that money wasn't available for other stuff?

Yep. Leech. I certainly couldn't be in a relationship with one.